[Coral-List] Impact of listing 66 coral species on coral research

[Steve Mussman]

   Dear Gene,
   I respectfully urge you to:

   â¢Reflect upon Dougâs vindication of the ESA.
   â¢Consider that NOAA may not be the personification of the devil.
   â¢Imagine that the fiscal cliff will be averted.
   â¢Recognize that your anonymous sources are curmudgeons.
   Please have a Merry Christmas / Happy Holidays and a Healthy New Year!
   Steve
   -----Original Message-----
   >From: Eugene Shinn
   >Sent: Dec 11, 2012 3:16 PM
   >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa..gov
   >Subject: [Coral-List] Impact of listing 66 coral species on coral research
   >
   >Well I am still waiting for someone on the Coral-List to spell out
   >how listing these coral species will save them. However, I did
   >receive lots of interesting comments from coral researchers off-line
   >and decided to share them without revealing their names. Here are a
   >few:
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   -----------------------------
   >Right Gene, not sure how listing these species will affect these
   >corals when the group advocating for these listings states that
   >climate change is the biggest reason for them being threatened. Also
   >claiming the aquarium trade is a problem is a bit of a red herring
   >since only a handful of the species (<5?) are traded in any
   >significant way plus much of the Acropora coming from Indonesia,
   >Vanuatu and Fiji is aquacultured.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------------
   >I can't wait until I retire so I can carry on saying the things that
   >need to be said to these folks.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------------
   >Eugene;
   > WELL SAID!
   > There are many instances that can be cited where the
   >legislated protection of a species has indeed positively impacted the
   >survival or resurgence of that species. But in every instance (of
   >which I am aware) the legislative action was necessary to either halt
   >harvest or implement a physical action to save the species. I wish
   >this were true of these 66 coral species, but I fear it is not. Hope
   >I'm wrong.
   > What the listing will definitely achieve however, will be a
   >morass of red tape and effective blockage of ALL coastal projects in
   >areas where one or more of these corals are thought to perhaps exist.
   >The unintended consequences of the listing are likely to be
   >widespread, expensive, and will ultimately result in the development
   >of adverse public opinion.
   > Like I said, I hope I'm wrong.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   ---------------------------------
   >Hi Gene
   >
   >Plus,  if these 66 corals are threatened, why aren't all corals being
   listed?
   >
   >Plus, population data are apparently not relevant. They don't care
   >how many are out there. We sent them population estimates for the six
   >species in the Keys, and the numbers are huge for most. And the ones
   >that have fewer numbers have always been rare. So, the population
   >biology of rare species does not matter.
   >
   >Group therapy is a good description of what they are doing. I would
   >add that they are also self-congratulatory to the point of delusion.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   ---------------------------------
   >
   >Don't look at me. I went to one of the meetings and vehemently
   >opposed this "new" listing. No recovery plan put forward for Acropora
   >corals, yet. Not good.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------------
   >Inmates are running the asylum.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   ---------------------------------
   > From an ex-Steinhart aquarist (albeit volunteer). Other impacts from
   >this new ESA designation that you may not anticipate:
   > You could now be required to do an ESA impact assessment to
   >launch a boat with bottom paint into tropical waters
   > Require another special license to take or culture any coral
   >on the ESA list. This permit will be overseen by an idiot in an air
   >conditioned office in the EPA DC office who has never left the
   >beltway and won't be able to look at your permit until next month
   >because of required training courses his office must attend.
   > Require special permits to maintain (don't even consider
   >rebuilding or expanding) any shoreline infrastructure in the tropics
   > Require all marine labs in the tropics (okay - probably all
   >residences too) to construct individual WWTPs to treat all sewage to
   >drinking level standards (there goes the research budget)
   > Given the present definition of "Take" will you be allowed to
   >swim over a reef and block the sunshine?
   > Require toilet facilities on ALL boats carrying divers - Yup,
   >even that 8-foot Avon!
   > What kind of a permit do you think it will require to allow
   >cultured (read: potentially contaminated) Diadema to be intentionally
   >placed near a bed of ESA corals? Humm...
   >
   >The list could go on and on, but you get the idea. Once these
   >regulations are established it will unleash the (deleted) who will
   >come up with hundreds of new rules all well intentioned, and all with
   >additional unanticipated affects.
   >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   -------------------------------
   >I have read your Op Ed with great interest and have concluded that
   >you know too much about these matters that are of gravest importance
   >to those who want to keep their job.
   >
   >As we plunge off the fiscal cliff (yes, I believe we will) remember
   >your natural history. All of those lemmings didn't die, otherwise the
   >species would now be extinct. Same applies to corals, a point you
   >have made very clearly.
   >
   >I would have added my own list of unintended consequences but right
   >now I am worried about Dec 21 which seems just a valid as a lot I
   >have been reading. I suppose that once listed we could use the
   >approach Fish and Wildlife is advocating for saving the spotted owl.
   >That approach would stop those pesky parrotfish from taking lethal
   >bites out of Montastrea sp. Gene
   >
   >--
   >
   >
   >No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
   >------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
   >E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
   >University of South Florida
   >College of Marine Science Room 221A
   >140 Seventh Avenue South
   >St. Petersburg, FL 33701
   >
   >Tel 727 553-1158----------------------------------
   >-----------------------------------
   >_______________________________________________
   >Coral-List mailing list
   >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
   >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list